|
GaussianCopula posted:Are you telling me that Molembeek, Belgium, is practically under the control of ISIS? No? But do you think that gang-like practices are above ISIS or something? The guy that orchestrated the attack on Paris lived there, he obviously has a support network there and could operate to some degree from there. Would you need to think there's more than a handful of ISIS guys in your neighbourhood to be scared of them?
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
Kurtofan posted:There's "being afraid to report" and "pelting media cars with rocks". It's not a stretch that a place that produced a lot of isis recruits would also have isis sympathizers living there. Oh definitely. I was talking more about general uncooperativeness rather than the specific incident with the car.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
punakone posted:Awesome, news saying that a kalashnikov rifle has been found. This will give the EU gun ban new steam to gently caress over legal hobbyists, even though the terrorists in Europe have had pretty much illegal weapons only. And here I thought NRA-style idiots who stand on top of the dead to cry about gun control was a distinctive american phenomenon, and this is not even after a mass shooting. Please take this poo poo to either another place, or another time, not here and now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
punakone posted:I am sorry, I thought it was okay when inside the EU parliament the speakers were telling the MEPs that those EVIL KALASHNIKOVS are used right at this moment, but I guess standing on top of the dead is okay if it is for your team There were a thousand different ways you could've made your posts, and the one you picked makes it blindingly obvious that you put disgustingly higher priority on gun control than you do on the actual terrorist attacks and the people that died in them. Take that attitude elsewhere or elsewhen.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Please cut the derail here.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Dawncloack posted:Hahaaahah! I see what you did there! I've read a couple of articles about how Germany's budget restraint to achieve GaussianCopula's favourite buzzword ~balanced budget~ has meant that infrastructure maintenance funding has been lacking.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
Brussels attacks: Nuclear alert after security officer found dead with his pass missing
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:So, uhm, can we now all agree that refugees entering the EU without controls are a security concern? If agreeing to them being a security concern means that the response would be tantamount to collective punishment against the refugees, no, we cannot. Terrorism against the west will end when the west stops pushing people into terrorism by military interventions, but even if you accept the current situation as-is punishing a lot of innocent people for the actions of a guilty few is wrong and would set an ugly precedent.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
I think we can all agree now that Belgians are a security concern in the EU.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
The way he's been going, I wouldn't be surprised if Erdogan came out as a flat earther tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
He curbed the influence the military had over civilian affairs which was a good thing, but he's been off the deep end for the past few years.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:It was not a good thing, given that the military was the stalwart protector of Atatürk's legacy, especially of secularism. Once the military and administration was purged, Erdogan revealed his true face. The military having influence over civilian affairs is a bad thing, just because Erdogan is poo poo otherwise doesn't change that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Chomskyan posted:https://charliehebdo.fr/en/edito/how-did-we-end-up-here/ CH has always been anti-religion, it's not particularly limited to anti-Islam. Granted, it is inaccurate to blame the terrorist attacks on the religion itself for being anything more than a context in which things happen, but I feel that singling them out as "Islamophobic" is also inaccurate. GaussianCopula posted:They are defending secularism and we should all stand side by side with them in this conflict. So inspired by them you can't even spell their name right?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 13:10
|
|
|
Chomskyan posted:The entire argument that piece is making is that every Muslim, no matter how integrated into European society, no matter how opposed to violence, bears responsibility for attacks by radical jihadists. Are you saying that's not Islamophobic? If CH was singling out Islam in its criticism of religion I would call it Islamophobic, but the point of view people like that take is a more generalised "religion is the reason that people do bad things in the name of religion", so in the case of Islamic terrorism they blame Islam, if it's something of a different faith they will blame that. "Islamophobic" carries the implication that the same attitude is not taken towards other religions. If I were to call CH something it would be "wrong", and maybe "stupid".
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
Chomskyan posted:Then I would like to see some examples of CH's take on other religions and why you feel they're at all comparable to the sweeping argument made in that editorial They are a publication that has run covers such as this (nws?) and are generally known to have a strong anti-religious stance in general. Are they saying that other religions are not as bad as Islam? I don't know, but I wouldn't believe so.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
The Greek government is banking on a debt deal after the first review and medium-term economic recovery, it would make no sense for them to call for snap elections anytime soon.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 11:42
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:So you are telling me that SYRIZA (and you) have suddenly changed their belief system and are now austerity zealots who believe the IMF is right in their projections? No, I am not saying that. The government is (probably) hoping things will just end up working out somehow, with renewed investment through the Juncker package, funds that will be available for spending after the debt deal and so on. Maybe that partly includes acceptance of some IMF axioms. But depending on what deal they agree on they might have trouble getting it through their own MPs. I guess that raises the spectre of elections, but it would take the IMF and EU deliberately making impossible demands for that to happen. As for me, don't conflate me with SYRIZA. I voted against them last election, and I don't plan on voting for them in future either. I still believe they're working in good faith, but they're wrong and Varoufakis was right.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 12:15
|
|
|
Remember, if you write a book, and want that book to sell, everything you ever write can forever be disregarded.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I'm not sure why you're melting down about a foreign politician but I don't think Varoufakis talking about how to fix Europe holds much credibility given he had an opportunity to govern but found it too hard and went back to being a pundit. Oh, you're taking the "he found it too hard to govern so he quit" line as a serious argument rather than a cheap burn? Please tell me under what circumstances a minister resigning would not qualify as them doing so because it's "too hard to govern".
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:The circumstances being him not having the moral courage to lead his country out of the union and instead, immediately after quitting setting up an organisation to change European politics? Did you miss the part where Varoufakis was finance minister under Tsipras instead of Supreme Leader?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Please clear up why Varoufakis not launching a coup d'etat makes him a lazy person that quit because governing is too hard.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:If Britain isn't the first to leave the EU, which country do you think will be? I could see it being Greece is the EU and IMF maintain a hardline stance, but I could also see countries like Poland or Hungary going too far right to handle being in the EU (though the EU would probably just dip to the right itself instead). Comedy option: AfD wins the next German election.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:How many Jews lived in North Africa 100 years ago? That you would state this in an argument comparing North Africa and Europe is beyond insane.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
Griffen posted:I am loathe to simply sum up Merkel's actions as "welp, there goes liberal Europe surrendering to the fundamentalist Middle East again..." as I am aware that Merkel is moving to have the portion of the law that allows such prosecutions removed. However, I do wonder what it says about the state of affairs when it's even potentially acceptable to prosecute someone for saying something insulting (slander/libel aside, as I doubt this applies), whether or not it's satire. What happened to the principles of free speech? The rapid erosion of press rights and speech rights in Turkey should be a warning to Europe, I would think. Orban should've been a warning to Europe. This is nothing new and has been going on for about a decade by this point.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
Please do not post your racist fantasies in this thread.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2016 12:16
|
|
|
The fantasy part was where you were speculating about what will happen down the line, the racist part was where you were smug about it. e; I'm not saying it's unlikely to happen, I'm saying don't be a racist poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2016 12:32
|
|
|
I already told you. As an additional thing, Nigeria might not be Iraq, Syria, or Afghanistan, but it's by no means safe.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
Ligur posted:No, you didn't. You just called me "smug". Explain what is racist in this case. If you can. You just call some poo poo "racist" but can't explain it, can you? You were being smug while talking about refugees and migrants (quite realistically) being met with closed borders, barbed wire, and armed soldiers in the future. I might have misread the tone of your post, and if I did I am sorry, but I do not think I did. Boko Haram is worse than just slums.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
Greens tend to go far in their distrust, but I would absolutely prefer if everything went into developing renewables instead of nuclear power.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 11:15
|
|
|
^e; Fusion might be cool, but I don't know how safe it is in case of total failure. If it's completely safe then yeah all for it, but even so it's still a much more experimental technology that would have to get off the ground floor, with renewables there's a bigger practical base to work on. I'm also going to go ahead and say the installation of a fusion reactor is probably much more expensive than that of renewables. Now I'm curious as to how many suicides can be attributed to ecological sensitivities. Whenever I've heard about stuff like the voluntary human extinction project the pro-extinction advocates had all been alive and well. YF-23 fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Apr 20, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Renewables is good, when it's not a disguise for coal. Germany is really bad at this. They figure that since trees can grow, then turning wood into charcoal and then burning it is the same as using renewable energy, right? Between that and mined coal (which is mined with gigantic bucket-wheel excavators that destroy old forests, arable lands, and entire villages as they roam around devouring the entire country like the Nothing from the Neverending Story), Germany is objectively much worse off environmentally than if they had went for full-on nuclear power. You will be happy to know that my definition of "renewables" is not, in fact, stupid, and the complete opposite of what it is supposed to be.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Lock the fucker in a cell and only give him Sonic 06 to play. Breivik is a mass murderer, but that doesn't mean that wishing crimes against humanity on him is OK.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
It doesn't matter if modern reactors and regulations are super-safe. Fukushima teaches us that 1. outdated technologies will be used, and 2. that regulations will be skirted. Fukushima happened in this age of "oh but nuclear power is super safe". It didn't matter that current technology and regulations are safe, because that assumes these technologies and regulations are present and adhered to in practice, which is an almost insane assumption to make. e; And even if we're talking about a brand new NPP, five, ten, twenty years down the road the thing will need maintenance, and there is absolutely nothing telling you it will receive that. YF-23 fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Apr 22, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:The windmill that will be ready for scrap in 15 years is much more desirable than a plant that needs maintenance, i agree. The difference here is that the wind turbine might stop functioning and be useless or whatever, whereas the power plant that doesn't receive proper maintenance continues to operate and becomes a mass-scale threat.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Fukushima teaches us that Japanese regulators are either incompetent or corrupt, it has no bearing on the security of nuclear power as a whole. Yes it does. You cannot say "nuclear disasters aren't a thing anymore in our day and age" in the face of a nuclear disaster. Because guess what, incompetent or corrupt regulators are not a Japan-only thing, it's something that can happen anywhere, and it seriously complicates nuclear power security as a whole. e; v I'll take that over an NPP security failure every single time. v
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
First I never said that coal is cleaner than nuclear, second my explicit point about Fukushima is that ignoring warnings and skirting regulations means that nuclear power is risky in practice no matter how secure it is in theory. Like you're telling me "oh but Japan ignored warnings" as if that somehow refutes my point that warnings don't matter when they're ignored. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
doverhog posted:You think the danger of regulations being ignored is too great, ok. Does that mean Germany did the right thing in replacing their nuclear with coal or that no new nuclear plants should be built, or what is the point you're making here exactly? No, it does not. I never commented on what Germany is doing. My original comment about nuclear power was that I wished that renewables were being developed further in its place. I made absolutely no comparison to fossils whatsoever, and I fully agree that on the large scale, nuclear power is preferable to fossil power (but renewables are preferable to both).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Friendly Humour posted:That's a failure of government, not technology. If a drat bursts because building regulations weren't followed when constructing it, that doesn't make hydropower a risky practice. Misuse of technology is the fault of the people in charge, not the technology being misused. It's not about whose fault it is, it's about how dangerous the technology is when it's anyone's fault.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
YF-23 posted:You will be happy to know that my definition of "renewables" is not, in fact, stupid, and the complete opposite of what it is supposed to be.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 18:30
|
|
A large portion of Germany's renewables is burning wood/biomass. So new age coal generation. Careful what you wish for. And no, renewables are not likely to totally offset fossil fuel useage.
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
Friendly Humour posted:So then you admit that Germany shutting down its nuclear plants was a disaster for the environment? I don't know the exact statistics, but my non-expert knowledge leads me to agree with that statement. I'm not sure why you are phrasing it using words like "admit", as though I am ashamed of it or something. CommieGIR posted:Then your definition of renewable as a solution for baseload is unachievable right now and you are proposing pipe dreams while raising Fukushima fearmongering. There's a bunch of things that are good and that we should strive for even though they are decidedly not short-term projects, such as full renewable energy, or full communism. Why do you call my statements wrt Fukushima "fear-mongering"?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2016 18:42
|
|